Frank Annino & Sons Construction, Inc. v. McArthur Restaurants, Inc.

Good Law
1989 Cal. App. LEXIS 1108·215 Cal. App. 3d 353·263 Cal. Rptr. 592
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 7, 1989B035360California2,244 words

Opinion

Opinion

Johnson, J.

Plaintiff Frank Annino & Sons Construction, Inc., and its former attorney, Kendall K. Watson (appellants), appeal from an order awarding sanctions under Code of Civil Procedure section 128.5 to Alain F. Dupuis, a former defendant in the action. We affirm.

Issues

The issues on appeal are: (1) Did the trial court have jurisdiction to entertain a motion for sanctions on behalf of a person whom plaintiff had previously dismissed as a party defendant?

(2) If the trial court had jurisdiction did it, nevertheless, abuse its discretion in awarding sanctions against plaintiff or its attorney for naming Dupuis as a defendant without a factual basis for doing so or for failing to dismiss Dupuis when they first knew or should have known there was no factual basis for naming him as a defendant?

(3) Should sanctions be imposed against appellants for pursuing a frivolous appeal?

Facts and Proceedings Below

The underlying action arose out of an alleged breach of contract by the corporate defendants in failing to give Annino Construction the first right of refusal on construction of new restaurants for defendants. Mr. Dupuis, president of one of the corporate defendants, was named…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.